Interesting use of reward mechanism incentive, but it kind of highlights the problem rather than offering an actual solution. Smoking is great for weight loss, too, if you're just going to spend money to assuage the human need to have the brain's reward centers activated. Or meth.

I wonder which is the more effective approach: offering money for positive results, "taxing" people for no results, or a combination.

In the end, maybe this study just shows that having some sort of external motivator helps. Like having a gym buddy. It's hard(er) to just motivate yourself compared to having some sort of reinforcing person/mechanism.

This is why most stars are skinny. If being skinny is your job, you will find the motivation to take care of it, most of the time.

I think my minimum price for weight loss would have to be on the scale of a few hundred a month at least. At least on the order of a part time job. $20 a month, would NOT motivate me... though, oddly enough, avoiding the $20 penalty for not making my goal might motivate me a bit. Mostly, though I think it would just motivate me not to participate in the study.

Amen. I have discovered that glass jars with those plastic sprouting lids are a cheap source of fresh sprouts. You can also use a colander with a cover to sprout in. Lots of stuff around the house can be used to sprout in.

I can make fermented cabbage and other vegetables--some you can't buy at any price--dirt cheap.

I can bake my own bread for next to nothing--I'm not sure it's as fortified as commercial bread (and maybe that's a good thing).

Face it gang, on some level this is absolutely horrifying. Due to corporate programming, our society has been brainwashed to see currency as more important than our own health. They had already gotten the belief pushed to the point where mothers would sell their own children to make some if it, and now we see that people refuse to change their own destructive ways without being promised some of it. Not for a decent reason like living better/longer/healthier... but for currency.

It is times like this that I am ashamed to be an American... the land of capitalism over everything, including your own survival.

/of course, I now have diabetes and have been told to eat better//not going to do it, but not because I want to be paid to do it///there are other reasons...

Huh! I wonder if paying students to study would result in better grades, too?

/ of course it would// but that would be 'throwing money at the problem'/// instead of biatchin' about teachers' unions and taxes//// ironically, libertarian capitalists don't believe in the power of money// rant

payattention:Face it gang, on some level this is absolutely horrifying. Due to corporate programming, our society has been brainwashed to see currency as more important than our own health. They had already gotten the belief pushed to the point where mothers would sell their own children to make some if it, and now we see that people refuse to change their own destructive ways without being promised some of it. Not for a decent reason like living better/longer/healthier... but for currency.

It is times like this that I am ashamed to be an American... the land of capitalism over everything, including your own survival.

/of course, I now have diabetes and have been told to eat better//not going to do it, but not because I want to be paid to do it///there are other reasons...

ugh, dude, seriously... it's a miserable way to go out... Uncle had it and refused... first they took his big toe in his right foot, then they had to take his right foot... Despite that he still didn't change eating habits, and no matter how much he claimed he would rather die happy than to change his diet, he couldn't breath for crap, and he didn't exactly have a beaming smile on face every time he had to move around...

TheOther:Huh! I wonder if paying students to study would result in better grades, too?

/ of course it would// but that would be 'throwing money at the problem'/// instead of biatchin' about teachers' unions and taxes//// ironically, libertarian capitalists don't believe in the power of money// rant

We already pay people for getting good grades. It's called getting a good job.

dopekitty74:If money were that much of a motivator, nobody would smoke cigarettes anymore either.

/i'm in the you'd have to pay me more than 20$ club.

My father's dead now, but not from lung cancer or heart disease. He smoked a pack and a half daily from the '40s to the '70s (all the cool kids were doing it during WWII, when death from torpedo was a more pressing concern). He got tired of the dorsal primate, and quit cold turkey. His incentivizing tactic was to put away, every day, the money he would have spent had he continued to smoke. For argument's sake, let's say it was seven-fifty per day (Canadian cigarettes are irresistible to the tax men).

He did this for about 40 years. When cigarettes went up in price, he would throw a great amount of money in a drawer. He'd bank it every few months in a separate account.

The total, adjusted for inflation, was nearly $110,000.

He bought two cars...in cash (which is inspirational to car salespeople, apparently) and paid off a house, which quadripled in value while he owned it. He left a nice mortgage-erasing packet to me and my sister. I should stress that he never made more than $35,000/year in his life. Not rich, but then even bums and the homeless can afford to smoke.

Similarly, I reject the notion that you can ever be too poor to eat properly, which is very small amounts of something that saw a factory between you and the field or the farmyard. I realize the entire food industry is offering everyone they can sucker into taking up the crack pipe of salt, sugar and fat, but that industry doesn't have to use your farked-up pancreas or damaged kidneys inside your lard-encased ass to get through the world.

You do.

If putting away ten bucks for every day you don't eat McDogfood's or snarf a sack of chips is the incentive, get on that. The monetary effects, when factored over time, can be dramatic...like really dramatic. And, of course, if you aren't a smoking salty sugar gravy gobbler, you'll have that time to pay for more than an XXL coffin.

Your choice: It's clear to me that the government is going to solve its underfunding of the old-age pension scam by encouraging people to eat themselves to death so that they never claim it. Path of least resistance, really, unless you are waiting for fatties to struggle onto public transit, even with the extra-strong lowering steps.

payattention:Face it gang, on some level this is absolutely horrifying. Due to corporate programming, our society has been brainwashed to see currency as more important than our own health. They had already gotten the belief pushed to the point where mothers would sell their own children to make some if it, and now we see that people refuse to change their own destructive ways without being promised some of it. Not for a decent reason like living better/longer/healthier... but for currency.

It is times like this that I am ashamed to be an American... the land of capitalism over everything, including your own survival.

/of course, I now have diabetes and have been told to eat better//not going to do it, but not because I want to be paid to do it///there are other reasons...

No. The brain has always had a hard tiem looking at long distant and non concrete payoffs. Thsi has nothing to do with corporate programming and more to do with how we are hardwired. You have an immediate desire to eat (and are generally more attracted to bad food) and the thought of what it will do to yoru waist and life expectancy down the road isn't immediate. The thought of money is much more concrete.

Valiente:dopekitty74: If money were that much of a motivator, nobody would smoke cigarettes anymore either.

/i'm in the you'd have to pay me more than 20$ club.

My father's dead now, but not from lung cancer or heart disease. He smoked a pack and a half daily from the '40s to the '70s (all the cool kids were doing it during WWII, when death from torpedo was a more pressing concern). He got tired of the dorsal primate, and quit cold turkey. His incentivizing tactic was to put away, every day, the money he would have spent had he continued to smoke. For argument's sake, let's say it was seven-fifty per day (Canadian cigarettes are irresistible to the tax men).

He did this for about 40 years. When cigarettes went up in price, he would throw a great amount of money in a drawer. He'd bank it every few months in a separate account.

The total, adjusted for inflation, was nearly $110,000.

He bought two cars...in cash (which is inspirational to car salespeople, apparently) and paid off a house, which quadripled in value while he owned it. He left a nice mortgage-erasing packet to me and my sister. I should stress that he never made more than $35,000/year in his life. Not rich, but then even bums and the homeless can afford to smoke.

Similarly, I reject the notion that you can ever be too poor to eat properly, which is very small amounts of something that saw a factory between you and the field or the farmyard. I realize the entire food industry is offering everyone they can sucker into taking up the crack pipe of salt, sugar and fat, but that industry doesn't have to use your farked-up pancreas or damaged kidneys inside your lard-encased ass to get through the world.

You do.

If putting away ten bucks for every day you don't eat McDogfood's or snarf a sack of chips is the incentive, get on that. The monetary effects, when factored over time, can be dramatic...like really dramatic. And, of course, if you aren't a smoking salty sugar gravy gobbler, you'll have that time to pay for more than an XXL coffin.

Your choice: It's clear to me that the government is going to solve its underfunding of the old-age pension scam by encouraging people to eat themselves to death so that they never claim it. Path of least resistance, really, unless you are waiting for fatties to struggle onto public transit, even with the extra-strong lowering steps.

GoldSpider:freeforever: Diet pills and supplements don't work because they don't make them like they used to:

[www.rippedfueloriginal.com image 350x540]

I don't buy into excessive supplements, but I'm definitely a believer in whey protein. I'm up at least 30% across the board on my weight training since December.

I find that creatine and whey protein always help me get bigger and stronger, but I'm not sure how much of it is the supplements, and how much of it is the fact that I work out harder because I just sunk $50 into supplements and I want to make sure I get the most out of them. It's a weird psychological thing, and not entirely rational. If working out is free, I don't do it as hard.

Tommy Moo:I find that creatine and whey protein always help me get bigger and stronger, but I'm not sure how much of it is the supplements, and how much of it is the fact that I work out harder because I just sunk $50 into supplements and I want to make sure I get the most out of them. It's a weird psychological thing, and not entirely rational. If working out is free, I don't do it as hard.

That's one of the reasons I bought a 1-year gym membership; if I'm paying for it, I'm going to use it. I'm there 5-6 days a week since December.

I've opted not to go with creatine, as I'm not as worried about "bulking up" as I want to get stronger and stay around the same weight (also running a lot and training for distance). It's a delicate balance, as I have to take enough calories in to grow muscle, but not too much that it gets stored as fat. Both are hard to balance with the calories I burn running 5-6 miles every few days. There's a good chance I could be doing this smarter, but so far this I'm pleased with my progress.

GoldSpider:I've opted not to go with creatine, as I'm not as worried about "bulking up" as I want to get stronger and stay around the same weight (also running a lot and training for distance). It's a delicate balance, as I have to take enough calories in to grow muscle, but not too much that it gets stored as fat. Both are hard to balance with the calories I burn running 5-6 miles every few days. There's a good chance I could be doing this smarter, but so far this I'm pleased with my progress

What are your distance goals?

I used to run 5-6 miles twise a week, and regular "heavy" lift twice a week. When I was training for a half marathon I would add a long run (and if time didn't permit, drop one of my 5-6 miles runs).

I found I got better results (in half marathons) when I started adding a day of sprints and adding some metabolic condition ing to my lifitng days. My only lift that suffered was bench.

Ran my first (and only) half-marathon a year and a half ago, but farked up my knee in the process. I'd like to run another one this year, preferably injury-free and in under 2 hours. Unlike last time, I'm gradually working up the mileage and logging many more runs.

liam76:I used to run 5-6 miles twise a week, and regular "heavy" lift twice a week. When I was training for a half marathon I would add a long run (and if time didn't permit, drop one of my 5-6 miles runs).

That's roughly what I'm doing. M-W-F are my lifting days, Tuesday and Saturday are my distance days, and a fast-as-I-can 5K on Sunday (though I'll probably use that as a rest day with the addition of my Saturday runs)

How did I lose all that gross fat? By combining the miracle of technology with ordinary street junkies! Producing this: Jimmy Tango's Fat Busters! It's this simple: wear my patented vibrating heat-bead suit, then jam an unbelievable amount of pure, raw crystal meth into your system! You might ask, "Isn't crystal meth illegal?" You bet! But my scientist, Dr. Cody, spends his days in a tin shed deep inside a small canyon outside San Bernadino, constantly altering the scientific formula of a bathtub crank that keeps us one step ahead the law, and keeps you one step ahead of the fat farm! Fatties, here's my promise: wear my vibrating heat beads, while blasting down handfuls of crrystal meth, and you'll drop weight so fast you'll lose your mind! Any questions?